Tuesday, 31 May 2016

It's easy to
take soil for granted. That is, until you lose it. The dirt beneath
your feet is arguably one of the most under-appreciated assets on the planet.
Without it, life would largely cease to exist while, when at its prime, this
"black gold" gives life.

In nature,
plants thrive because of a symbiotic relationship with their surrounding
environment, including microorganisms in the soil.

The rhizosphere
is the area immediately around a plant's root. It contains microorganisms that
thrive on chemicals released from the plant's roots. These chemicals, known as
exudates, include carbohydrates, phytochemicals and other compounds.

In exchange
for the exudates, the root microbiome supplies the plant with important
metabolites for health, which, along with exposure to pests and pathogens,
helps plants produce phytochemicals.

A well-fed
root microbiome will also supply plants with ample nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P)
and potassium (K) — the three ingredients that also make up most synthetic
fertilizer (NPK).

Unfortunately,
while nature's system results in handsome rewards, including more nutritious
foods and less environmental
pollution, modern-day farmers have largely become stuck in a cycle of
dousing crops with synthetic chemicals that destroy the soil and,
ultimately, the environment.

Why Synthetic Fertilizers Are Ruining the
Planet

Synthetic
fertilizers make sense in theory, and they do make plants grow bigger and faster. The problem is that
the plants are not necessarily healthier.
In fact, they miss out on the symbiotic relationship with their root
microbiome.

Because
they're being supplied with NPK, the plant no longer "wastes" energy
producing exudates to feed its microbiome.

Therefore,
it receives fewer metabolites for health in return. The end result is plants
that look good on the outside but lack minerals, phytochemicals and defenses
against pests and disease on the inside.

Further, as
reported by Rick Haney, a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil scientist,
less than 50 percent of synthetic fertilizers applied to crops are used by the
plants. Haney told Orion Magazine:1

"Farmers are risk averse … They've
borrowed a half million dollars for a crop that could die tomorrow. The last
thing they want to worry about is whether they put on enough fertilizer. They
always put on too much, just to be safe."

The excess
fertlizer runs off into the environment, with disastrous effects. As fertilizer
runs off of farms in agricultural states like Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois,
Wisconsin, Missouri and others, it enters the Mississippi River, leading to an
overabundance of nutrients, including nitrogen and phosphorus, in the water.

This, in
turn, leads to the development of algal blooms, which alter the food chain and
deplete oxygen, leading to dead zones. One of the largest dead zones worldwide
can be found in the Gulf of Mexico, beginning at the Mississippi River delta.2 Fisheries in
the Gulf of Mexico have been destroyed as a result.

Soil Health Campaign Educates Farmers How to
Work With Nature

USDA's
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) convenes sessions around the U.S. in an effort to
improve soil health and teach farmers how to use less fertilizer and produce the
same, and in some cases better, yields. Haney told Orion Magazine:3

"Our
entire agriculture industry is based on chemical inputs, but soil is not a
chemistry set … It's a biological system. We've treated it like a chemistry set
because the chemistry is easier to measure than the soil biology."

While
standard soil tests measure chemical properties in the soil, Haney developed a
test to measure soil biology. A rich microscopic community is what Haney is
after. Only this can support the fascinatingly complex process of plant growth
and, at the same time, naturally cut carbon emissions by fixing carbon in the
soil.

It's
estimated that one-third of the surplus carbon dioxide in the atmosphere stems
from poor land-management processes that contribute to the loss of carbon, as
carbon dioxide, from farmlands.4 Writing in
Orion Magazine, Kristin Ohlson, author of "The Soil Will Save Us,"
explained:5

"When
we admire good soil's dark chocolate-cake sponginess and sweet smell, we're
admiring the handiwork of trillions of soil microorganisms over time.

They eat
carbon and expire carbon dioxide, just as we do, but they also "fix"
a percentage of that carbon in the soil. Barring disturbance, it stays there
for a very long time.

…
Photosynthesis is the only process that safely and inexpensively removes carbon
dioxide from the atmosphere, allowing carbon that is a problem in the skies to
become a boon for the land.

Based on
this principle, one hundred governments and nonprofits launched the 4/1000
Initiative … calling for an increase of carbon in the world's soils by 0.4
percent per year.

This
relatively small boost will not only radically improve soil fertility but also,
the coalition claims, halt the annual rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide."

Three 'Game-Changing' Practices for
Agriculture

Carbon
farming is a simple premise that involves using agricultural methods that can naturally
trap carbon dioxide in the ground (for decades, centuries or more) while also
absorbing it from the air.

Reduce the
need for agricultural chemicals and additives, if not eliminate such need
entirely in time

Reduce
atmospheric carbon dioxide levels

Reduce air
and water pollution by lessening the need for herbicides, pesticides, and
synthetic fertilizers

A recent
study published in the journal Nature further revealed that by managing soils
to reduce greenhouse gases, it could lead to a wealth of "side
benefits," including healthier soils and ecosystems, less fertilizer
runoff and less soil erosion.6

In an
interview with The Christian Science Monitor, Phil Robertson of Michigan State
University explained three "game-changing" practices that could help
make soils "net mitigating," meaning they capture more greenhouse
gases than they emit.7

The latter
strategy alone, cover crops, can virtually eliminate the need for irrigation
when done right. The cover crops also act as insulation, so the soil doesn't
get as hot or cold as it would if bare. This allows microbes to thrive longer.

Also, the
soil biology heats up the soil, which can extend your overall growing season in
colder areas, and it helps prevent soil erosion. In 2012, a Census of
Agriculture report found just over 10 million acres of farmland (out of 390
million total) were being planted with cover crops, but its use is growing.

In an annual
survey of farmers taken in 2014, farmers reported planting double the mean
acreage in cover crops reported in 2010.8 Farmers who
adopt the technique have reported better soil texture, less erosion, and
increased crop yields.

Planting Winter Cover Crops May Make Farmers
Money

This is key,
because convincing most farmers to change their practices solely for
environmental reasons isn't an easy proposition, especially if it also involves
increased costs to the farmer. Robertson recommends using conservation
payments, which have been in place for decades, to pay farmers to adopt more
sustainable agricultural practices.

Some farmers
also change their ways after seeing the success of their neighbors' farms.
Farmer Doug Anson, who along with his family plants cover crops on 13,000 of
their 20,000 acres of Indiana farmland, told The New York Times:9

"In
the part of a field where we had planted cover crops, we were getting 20 to 25
bushels of corn more per acre than in places where no cover crops had been
planted … That showed me it made financial sense to do this."

A research project
that's been ongoing for two decades in Michigan, comparing crop plots using
four different farming methods, has also shown promise for cover crops. The
fields that received small amounts of fertilizer and were planted with winter
cover crops had yields similar to conventional fields with far less nitrogen
leaching.10

The U.S.
government has even set up a small subsidy system to help farmers offset the
costs of cover crops and other regenerative
practices, but one major hurdle to cover crops becoming mainstream involves
absentee land owners.

Many farmers
grow crops on land they do not own but rather lease; they therefore have little
incentive to want to improve soil quality on land they do not own. Landowners
could, however, offer incentives to farmers to use regenerative practices that
would, in turn, increase the value of their land.11

Farmers and Landowners Can Get Paid for
'Carbon Credits'

Conventional
farmers have much to gain from trying out carbon-sequestration practices like planting cover
crops, applying compost and not tilling; they can accumulate, and be paid for,
carbon credits.

Farmers can
even use the USDA's COMET-Farm online tool to find out their approximate carbon
footprint, as well as experiment to see which land-management practices
sequester the most carbon on their farm.12 How does it
work? Modern Farmer explained:13

"Land-based
carbon sequestration is measured in metric tons per hectare (2.5 acres); one
metric ton earns one carbon credit, making the math easy. In California — the
only state in the US with a full-fledged cap-and-trade program — the current
value of a carbon credit is around $12 to $13. (Farmers in other states, by the
way, are eligible to earn credits through the California carbon market.)

Alberta,
which has the most robust carbon market in Canada and rewards several
agricultural practices with carbon credits, raised the price of carbon credits
from $15 to $20 on January 1, 2016; in 2017, the price will go up to $30 per
credit."

Unfortunately,
the way the system is currently set up, farmers already using beneficial
conservation practices are not eligible for carbon credits. Only those
switching land from conventional agriculture to soil-conservation practices may
receive credits, with the exception of spreading compost over grazed
grasslands, which are used to raise grass-fed beef and other pastured animal products.

This
recently approved carbon credit "protocol" was largely the result of
the Marin Carbon Project, which found a single 1/2-inch dusting of compost on
rangeland can boost the soil's carbon storage for at least 30 years.

If you're a
farmer interested in receiving carbon credits, you'll need to sign up with a
carbon credit registry such as the Climate Action Reserve, the American Carbon
Registry, or and the Verified Carbon Standard. An inspector will visit your
farm regularly to ensure you've carried out the protocols correctly.14

Regenerating Our Soil Is the Solution

It's clear
that paying attention to our soils is crucial to our health and future. Fortunately, change
is occurring both on large and small scales. The USDA's NRCS has become very
committed to understanding and teaching about natural soil health and
regenerative agriculture

Not only
will regenerating our soils lead to improved food production, it will also
address a majority of resource concerns, such as water. When you add carbon
back into the soil, such as by adding mulch or cover crops, the carbon feeds mycorrhizal
fungi that eventually produce glomalin, which may be even better than humic
acid at retaining water. This means you naturally limit your irrigation needs
and make your garden or fields more resilient during droughts.

Considering
data suggesting we may lose all commercial topsoil, globally, in the next 60
years if we keep going at the current rate, such changes cannot move fast
enough. The NRCS
website is an excellent resource for anyone interested in learning more
about soil health, including farmers wanting to change their system.

At present,
about 10 percent of U.S. farmers have started incorporating practices to
address soil health. Only about 2 percent have transitioned to full-on
regenerative land management, however. On an individual level, you can get
involved by growing some of your own food using these regenerative principles
on a small scale.

We provide
a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking
services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your
info further!

This site
is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT (unless an
individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder).
Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged - if you
give attribution to the work & author and include all links in the original
(along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free
to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you
never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember
attribution!

If you
like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large)
or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long
and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…

Monday, 30 May 2016

Researchers
state thatfrom
the scale depicted by the human figures, these megaliths are much larger (as
much as 2 to 3 times larger) than the largest known megaliths in the
world. Preliminary studies suggest that there are blocks of stone at
Gornaya Shoria which weigh around three to
four thousand tons.

The
Megaliths of Baalbek are considered by mainstream scholars as some of the most
impressive on planet Earth. However, there are numerous other sites that just as
Baalbek, are beyond fascinating and completely defy our understanding of
ancient civilizations and their capabilities in the distant past.

Baalbek is
impressive, it is the ultimate evidence of sophisticated ancient cultures that
mastered engineering and architecture, yet it remains a profound mystery in the
eyes or mainstream scholars. Mainstream archaeology has different points of
view when it comes to the exact age of the site. According to conventional
archaeologists, it was a Phoenician sanctuary dedicated to the god Baal, it was
a Greek City called Heliopolis (City of the Sun) and since the time of Emperor
Augustus, it was a Roman colony. The truth is, the exact age remains a mystery,
but some researchers consider this ancient megalithic site as being at least
12.000 years old but could possibly be over 20,000 years old.

The great
platform upon which the temple of Baalbek was built is majestic, but today only
a few columns remain standing. It is a construction that modern archaeologists
and engineers cannot explain given the history and age that have been
“officially” accepted. Some believe that history has got it all wrong when it
comes to Baalbek.

However, the
megaliths located in Russia are even more impressive than Baalbek and have
caused confusion among researchers ever since their discovery.

We are
talking about the megalithic site of Gornaya Shoria, located deep in the
Siberian Mountains, where during one of the expeditions to the
site, compasses of the geologists behaved very strangely and for some
unknown reason their arrows were deviating from the megaliths. (source)

This
impressive megalithic site is one of the largest sites ever discovered in
Russia. Located on Mount Shoria in southern Siberia, the site contains
some of the largest blocks of stone with flat surfaces, right angles, and
sharp corners resembling cyclopean masonry ever discovered. The giant
megaliths were found and photographed for the first time by Georgy Sidorov who
explored the area for the first time in 2013. Ever since its discovery, this megalithic
site has caused great debate among researchers and archaeologists who cannot
agree whether or not the mysterious stones with flat surfaces, right angles,
and sharp corners are man-made structures or not.

Preliminary
studies suggest that there are blocks of tone which weigh around three to four
thousand tons. What makes this site, even more, interesting is the fact that
this extremely heavy blocks of stone have been stacked up to forty meters in
height.

Without a
doubt, the origin, purpose, and construction methods used into construction
process of this ancient site remain a mystery, but their beauty, precision, and
importance will remain a subject of debate in the years to come.

Very
interesting comments regarding the megalithic site were made by archaeologist
John Jensen:

The
super megaliths were found and photographed for the first time by Georgy
Sidorov on a recent expedition to the Southern Siberian mountains.

There
are no measurements given, but from the scale depicted by the human figures, these
megaliths are much larger (as much as 2 to 3 times larger) than the largest
known megaliths in the world. (Example: The Pregnant Woman Stone of Baalbek,
Lebanon weighs in at approximately 1,260 tons). Some of these megaliths
could easily weigh upwards of 3,000 to 4,000 tons.

There is
little commentary on Valery’s site, so the images are displayed here
without many comments, other than my own limited observations.”

So what are
the enigmatic stones found at Gornaya Shoria? Are these structures the result of
ancient man’s ingenious construction methods? Or are they the result of mother
nature’s incredible constructions.

Cyclopean
masonry or not, the enigmatic megalithic blocks of stone of Gornaya Shoria have
challenged mainstream archaeologists and researchers once again, forcing them
into a debate that seeks to uncover the truth behind numerous similar ancient
sites found around the globe.

We provide
a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking
services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your
info further!

This site
is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT (unless an
individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder).
Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged - if you
give attribution to the work & author and include all links in the original
(along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free
to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you
never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember
attribution!

If you
like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large)
or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long
and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…

Follow New Illuminati on Twitter

SUBSCRIBE to the NEW ILLUMINATI YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Contact Us

Welcome to the new Enlightenment, an era when suppressed science, hidden history and the enlightening nature of reality are all revealed to those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

These are the thoughts and ideas of New Illuminati - bold forerunners and pioneers of new awareness all over the globe.

Notes on new emerging paradigms from the NEXUS New Times Magazine Founder R. Ayana, who lives in a remote Australian rainforest (and is no longer involved with the magazine) - Catching drops from the deluge in a paper cup since 1984.

§ 107.Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include — (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

This material is published under Creative Commons Copyright – reproduction for non-profit use is OK. Awesome Inc. theme. Powered by Blogger.

Claimer

All opinions, facts, debates and conjectures xpressed herein are xtrusions of macrocosmic consciousness into your field of awareness. The New Illuminati are not to be held responsible or accountable for flashes of insight, epiphany, curiosity, transformation or enlightenment experienced by any person, human or otherwise.